The possible participation of a city councillor in a controversial vote next week is being called into question by a group of "concerned Kingstonians."

In a news release Friday morning, the Coalition of Kingston Communities, an organization of more than a dozen community and neighbourhood associations that have banded together to influence city planning and policy decisions, said Trillium District councillor Adam Candon would be in a conflict of interest if he took part in a scheduled vote on The Capitol project, a proposed condominium tower on the site of the former Capitol Theatre at 223 Princess St.

On Tuesday, city council is to vote on an amendment to the zoning bylaw that would permit the tower to be built to a height of 15 storeys, seven storeys higher than is currently permitted.

Candon is a real estate agent and, up until a few days ago, had a website that advertised the condominiums to be built in The Capitol project to prospective buyers.

The website, www.KingstonCondoKings.com, now states that it is "under construction."

"The inference to be drawn from this is that Coun. Candon is seeking customers for The Capitol project," the news release stated. "The group has approached the city clerk, the city solicitor, and the mayor about the issue. Thus far, it appears no action has been taken."

On Friday afternoon, Candon replied via email that he believes he is not in a conflict but has sought independent legal advice to determine his next actions.

"If I have a conflict of interest, I will gladly remove myself from the Sept. 20 vote," he wrote in an email to the Whig-Standard. "If it is determined that I do not have a conflict of interest, then I will fulfil my obligations to my constituents by voting."

Candon said he has never met the developer advancing The Capitol project and said he has not advertised or promoted the project.

"I have never met the owner of In8 Developments," he wrote. "I have not sold a unit in the project. I have never had any type of legal contract with their company and I have never even stepped foot in their sales centre.

"I can not help but feel this may be a form of bullying or intimidation in an attempt to stop the democratic process. In any account, I will be taking the advice of my legal council moving forward."

Earlier this month, the height amendment motion was rejected by the city's planning committee in a 3-3 tie vote.

The company proposing the project, Waterloo-based IN8 Developments, has reduced the height of the tower from 20 to 15 storeys in the past year.

Planning committee members Richard Allen, Laura Turner and Liz Schell voted in favour of the amendment.

Councillors Jim Neill, Lisa Osanic and Jeff McLaren voted against it.

Motions defeated at committee are still forwarded to full council for consideration, but do so without any recommendations.

In response to an inquiry by the Whig-Standard, the city clerk's department said Tuesday's council meeting will be governed by the usual rules that guide all public meetings.

"As is the process for every meeting of council, and in accordance with the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, the contents of the agenda includes a section at the outset of the meeting under the title 'Disclosure of Potential Pecuniary Interest,' at which point councillors are provided the opportunity to publicly advise on any pecuniary interest in relation to any matter on the agenda," the clerk's department stated.

"It is the obligation of each individual member of council to make this determination and declare any such interest at that point of the meeting."